From: George Murphy (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Dec 21 2002 - 07:25:48 EST
Adrian Teo wrote:
> Hello George,
> You wrote:
> 1) The fact that Paul "simply assumes" Adam to
>have been an historical human
> should raise questions about the claim that such a belief
>is essential to the
> theological point that he is making.
> AT: On the contrary, the very point Paul was trying to make
>was to draw the parallel between Adam and Christ. Through one, all
>sinned, and through one,
> Read from 1Cor 15:20 also.
Well, that's the question, isn't it? What is the point Paul is making?
What use does he make of the parallel between Adam & Christ?
> 2) & in fact it simply is not true that "the
>reality of original sin in all of
> us necessitates a single source." In Romans 1:18-3:20 Paul
>speaks in detail of the
> sinfulness of all human beings without referring to Adam
>or, indeed, to any historical
> source for that phenomenon.
> AT: In context, Paul was trying the persuade the
>Judaizers that Jews were as guilty as Gentiles were. The comparison
>here was between Jews and Gentiles, whereas in
>chapter 5, the comparison was between Adam and Christ.
The structures of the 2 passages are hardly parallel but that
isn't the main
point. 1:18-3:20 shows the universal sinfulness of humanity, & this
is done with no
reference to origins.
> With due respect for your theological expertise, I
have to disagree
with you in this case.
Our respect is mutual but we continue to disagree.
George L. Murphy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Dec 21 2002 - 13:06:56 EST